Quantification of common root rot symptoms in resistant and susceptible barley by image analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of tests were carried out to determine the effect of common root rot, caused by Cochliobolus sativus, on root growth and discolouration in the moderately resistant cv. Bonanza and the susceptible cv. Gateway of barley. An image analyser was used to quantify the growth and discolouration (mean intensity) of the roots and the subcrown internode (SCI) of individual plants. The plants were also visually rated for root rot severity and their root dry weight was determined. In the absence of disease, no differences in root discolouration or growth were observed between the two barley cultivars. In plants grown in naturally infested soil, visual root rot ratings and mean intensity values indicated that the SCls of Bonanza were less discoloured than those of cv. Gateway. In cv. Gateway, higher levels of disease were usually associated with a smaller root system than in cv. Bonanza, but the effect was significant (P < 0.01) only in the first experiment. The root system of cv. Gateway had lower (P > 0.05) mean intensity values (i.e., darker) than those of cv. Bonanza in the first experiment. Seedling emergence of cv. Gateway was lower in naturally infested soil than in fumigated soil, but this was not evident in cv. Bonanza. There was a strong inverse relationship between the mean intensity and visual rating of the SCI and a positive association between total root area as measured using image analysis and root weight. Image analysis also determined that in the severe root rot category, plants of cv. Gateway had SCIs that were more discoloured than those of cv. Bonanza. Discolouration of the SCI of root rot susceptible barley appeared to adversely influence the growth and discolouration of the root system, but this effect was not always significant.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".